一键导入
automotive-dfm-benchmarking
Automotive Dfm Benchmarking expertise. Covers 1 topics: Dfm Benchmarking.
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt,粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里,让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
菜单
Automotive Dfm Benchmarking expertise. Covers 1 topics: Dfm Benchmarking.
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt,粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里,让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
基于 SOC 职业分类
39 agent definitions for specialized automotive roles: safety engineer, ADAS architect, AUTOSAR expert, BMS engineer, cybersecurity analyst, SOTIF specialist, and more.
192 automation scripts for 33 command categories: testing, diagnostics, ADAS, AUTOSAR, safety, etc.
Architecture guides, getting started, project documentation. 70 reference documents covering archive, getting-started.
Production-ready automotive code examples from automotive-claude-code-agents. Includes BMS ECU firmware (C), ADAS perception pipeline (Python), battery thermal modeling, network topologies, multi-region cloud deployment (Terraform/K8s), and automotive protocol demos. Use when the user wants real working code for automotive ECUs, ADAS, BMS, or deployment.
Helm charts for automotive cloud services. 3 configuration files.
Pre-commit, pre-push, post-commit, and post-deploy Git hooks for automotive ASPICE compliance. 24 hook scripts across 5 lifecycle stages.
| name | automotive-dfm-benchmarking |
| description | Automotive Dfm Benchmarking expertise. Covers 1 topics: Dfm Benchmarking. |
| tags | ["automotive","automotive-dfm-benchmarking"] |
Benchmarking framework based on the Driver Foundation Model (DFM) concept for evaluating autonomous driving systems. DFM uses large-scale naturalistic driving data (NDD) to model human driver behavior distributions, providing a human-performance baseline for AD system evaluation. This skill supports scenario generation, performance benchmarking, and safety argument construction using NDD-derived metrics.
驾驶员基础模型 (Driver Foundation Model) 概念
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Core Idea:
Human drivers provide a safety baseline:
- Average driver: ~1 fatality per 10^8 km (developed countries)
- Good driver: ~10x safer than average
- AD must be at least as safe as good human driver
DFM Approach:
1. Collect large-scale NDD (7.5M+ aerial trajectories)
2. Model human driving behavior distributions
3. Extract scenario-specific performance baselines
4. Benchmark AD systems against human baselines
5. Quantify relative safety improvement
DFM as Foundation Model:
├── Pre-trained on massive NDD
├── Captures diverse driving styles and conditions
├── Fine-tunable for specific scenarios/regions
├── Provides probabilistic behavior predictions
└── Serves as benchmark generator and evaluator
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
# NDD Processing Pipeline for DFM
class NDDProcessor:
"""
Process Naturalistic Driving Data for DFM benchmarking.
Supports aerial trajectory data (drone-based) and fleet data.
"""
def __init__(self, data_source: str):
"""
data_source options:
- "aerial": Drone-based trajectory extraction (7.5M+ trajectories)
- "fleet": Vehicle-mounted sensor data
- "hybrid": Combined aerial + fleet data
"""
self.source = data_source
def extract_driving_primitives(self, trajectories):
"""
Extract fundamental driving behaviors from trajectory data.
Driving primitives:
- Car-following (跟车)
- Lane-changing (换道)
- Merging (汇入)
- Diverging (分流)
- Crossing (交叉)
- Free-driving (自由行驶)
"""
primitives = {
"car_following": self.extract_car_following(trajectories),
"lane_change": self.extract_lane_changes(trajectories),
"merge": self.extract_merges(trajectories),
"diverge": self.extract_diverges(trajectories),
"crossing": self.extract_crossings(trajectories),
"free_driving": self.extract_free_driving(trajectories),
}
return primitives
def build_behavior_distributions(self, primitives):
"""
Build statistical distributions of driving behaviors.
For car-following:
- Time headway distribution: P(THW)
- TTC distribution: P(TTC)
- Speed distribution: P(v | context)
- Acceleration distribution: P(a | context)
- Lane offset distribution: P(offset | context)
"""
distributions = {}
for primitive_type, data in primitives.items():
distributions[primitive_type] = {
"thw": fit_distribution(data.thw_values),
"ttc": fit_distribution(data.ttc_values),
"speed": conditional_distribution(data.speeds, data.contexts),
"acceleration": conditional_distribution(data.accels, data.contexts),
"lateral_offset": fit_distribution(data.offsets),
"jerk": fit_distribution(data.jerks),
}
return distributions
def generate_benchmark_scenarios(self, distributions, n_scenarios=1000):
"""
Generate benchmark scenarios by sampling from behavior distributions.
Importance sampling: over-sample from tail (critical) regions
"""
scenarios = []
for i in range(n_scenarios):
# Sample scenario type based on exposure
scenario_type = sample_weighted(distributions.keys(),
weights=exposure_weights)
# Sample parameters from distribution
params = sample_from_distribution(
distributions[scenario_type],
sampling="importance", # over-sample tails
criticality_weight=2.0
)
scenarios.append(BenchmarkScenario(
type=scenario_type,
parameters=params,
human_baseline=distributions[scenario_type],
))
return scenarios
DFM基准评测指标体系
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Safety Metrics (安全性指标):
├── Collision rate vs. human baseline
├── Near-miss rate (TTC < 1.5s events)
├── Safety-critical event rate
├── Minimum TTC distribution comparison
└── Emergency braking frequency
Comfort Metrics (舒适性指标):
├── Acceleration distribution vs. human
├── Jerk distribution vs. human
├── Lateral offset smoothness
├── Speed profile consistency
└── Ride quality index
Efficiency Metrics (效率指标):
├── Travel time vs. human baseline
├── Throughput at bottlenecks
├── Speed utilization (actual/limit ratio)
└── Lane utilization efficiency
Human-Likeness Metrics (类人性指标):
├── Trajectory similarity (Fréchet distance)
├── Decision timing similarity
├── Speed profile similarity (DTW distance)
├── Gap acceptance distribution similarity
└── Lane change timing similarity
Overall DFM Score:
DFM_score = w_s × Safety + w_c × Comfort + w_e × Efficiency + w_h × HumanLikeness
where: w_s > w_c > w_e > w_h (safety weighted highest)
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
# DFM Benchmarking Protocol
class DFMBenchmark:
"""
Benchmark AD system against human driver baseline using DFM.
"""
def __init__(self, dfm_model, ad_system):
self.dfm = dfm_model # Trained DFM with human baselines
self.ad = ad_system # AD system under test
def run_benchmark(self, scenario_suite):
"""
Run complete benchmark suite.
Returns:
- Per-scenario comparison (AD vs. human)
- Aggregate safety/comfort/efficiency scores
- Failure mode analysis
- Improvement recommendations
"""
results = []
for scenario in scenario_suite:
# Get human baseline for this scenario
human_baseline = self.dfm.predict_behavior(scenario)
# Run AD system in same scenario
ad_behavior = self.ad.simulate(scenario)
# Compare
comparison = self.compare_behaviors(
human=human_baseline,
ad=ad_behavior,
scenario=scenario
)
results.append(comparison)
return self.aggregate_results(results)
def compare_behaviors(self, human, ad, scenario):
"""Compare AD behavior with human baseline"""
return {
"scenario_id": scenario.id,
"safety": {
"ad_min_ttc": ad.min_ttc,
"human_min_ttc_percentile": human.ttc_percentile(ad.min_ttc),
"collision": ad.collision_occurred,
"safety_score": self.compute_safety_score(ad, human),
},
"comfort": {
"ad_max_accel": ad.max_acceleration,
"human_accel_percentile": human.accel_percentile(ad.max_acceleration),
"ad_max_jerk": ad.max_jerk,
"comfort_score": self.compute_comfort_score(ad, human),
},
"human_likeness": {
"trajectory_distance": frechet_distance(ad.trajectory, human.mean_trajectory),
"speed_profile_dtw": dtw_distance(ad.speed_profile, human.mean_speed),
"decision_timing_diff": abs(ad.decision_time - human.mean_decision_time),
},
}
def generate_report(self, results):
"""Generate benchmark report with visualizations"""
report = {
"overall_dfm_score": self.compute_overall_score(results),
"safety_rating": self.rate_safety(results),
"scenarios_worse_than_human": self.find_deficiencies(results),
"scenarios_better_than_human": self.find_strengths(results),
"improvement_priorities": self.prioritize_improvements(results),
}
return report
版本对比评测
├── Input: AD System v1.0, v2.0
├── Benchmark: Same DFM scenario suite
├── Output:
│ ├── Per-scenario performance delta
│ ├── Regression identification (v2 worse than v1)
│ ├── Improvement quantification
│ └── Overall DFM score trend
└── Use case: Release gate decision
跨平台评测
├── Input: Multiple AD systems (OEM A vs. B vs. C)
├── Benchmark: Standardized DFM scenario suite
├── Output:
│ ├── Comparative safety ranking
│ ├── Comfort comparison
│ ├── Scenario-specific strengths/weaknesses
│ └── Industry positioning
└── Use case: C-NCAP, IIHS, consumer testing
SOTIF证据生成
├── Input: AD system + DFM human baselines
├── Analysis: Per-scenario risk comparison
├── Output:
│ ├── Scenarios where AD safer than human → evidence
│ ├── Scenarios where AD less safe → risk
│ ├── Statistical safety argument
│ └── Residual risk quantification
└── Use case: ISO 21448 compliance, type approval
automotive-scenario-driven-testing — Scenario-based V&V methodologyautomotive-sotif-hazard-scenario — SOTIF scenario constructionautomotive-e2e-safety-analysis — E2E AD safety analysisautomotive-china-l3-ads-compliance — L3 validation requirements